Belk v. Compaq Computer Corp, et al

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
July 11, 2003
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-21274
Summary Calendar
ANTHONY RICARDO BELK,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
COMPAQ COMPUTER CORPORATION; DOE’S
A through Z, inclusive; JIM MIDDLETON;
ANN DAY; DAN WILLIAMS; YVONNE JACKSON;
ALTHEA WOMBLE,
Defendants-Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
(H-01-CV-4516)
--------------------
Before DAVIS, WIENER, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Plaintiff-Appellant Anthony Ricardo Belk, proceeding pro se,
appeals from the district court’s dismissal of his action with
prejudice. At the heart of that court’s two-phase dismissal of the
multiple claims asserted by Belk is his protracted failure to
comply with the court’s two orders that Belk amend his complaint to

-- 1 of 2 --

2
state grounds on which relief could be granted. Despite Belk’s
numerous accusations against defendants, defense counsel, and even
the district court, the only issue cognizable on this appeal is the
court’s orders of dismissal, which we review for abuse of
discretion.
We have painstakingly reviewed the record on appeal and the
assertions of the parties in their appellate briefs. As a result,
we are firmly convinced that the district court committed no legal
error and did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Belk’s claims.
We therefore affirm the rulings appealed by Belk.
Furthermore, we have observed with concern the essentially
conclusional accusations leveled by Belk at, among others, the
district court. Although that court was exceedingly tolerant of
this pro se litigant’s vituperative and —— to our satisfaction ——
unfounded attacks on the court’s motives and integrity, we are less
tolerant. Belk’s largely unsupported accusations and their
vituperative tenor seriously approach —— and likely cross —— the
line separating vigorous advocacy and sanctionable behavior. We
caution Belk that any further displays of this nature will expose
him to the full panoply of sanctions at the disposal of the courts,
including contempt.
AFFIRMED at Appellant’s cost.
S:\OPINIONS\UNPUB\02\02-21274.0.wpd
4/29/04 9:25 am

-- 2 of 2 --